• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 프라그마틱 카지노 capacity to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, 프라그마틱 정품인증 turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 무료게임 example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.